Hydrogen has emerged as a critical fuel for decarbonizing power generation, with gas turbines playing a central role in enabling flexible, large-scale hydrogen combustion. Two distinct classes of turbines—aeroderivative and heavy-duty frame—have evolved with differing design philosophies, operational strengths, and suitability for hydrogen blending or pure hydrogen operation. This comparison examines their technical distinctions, performance characteristics, and real-world applications, with a focus on leading models like the Siemens SGT-800 (aeroderivative) and GE 9HA (heavy-duty frame).

Aeroderivative turbines, derived from aircraft engine technology but adapted exclusively for stationary power, prioritize high efficiency, rapid response, and modularity. The Siemens SGT-800 exemplifies this class, with a compact, lightweight design featuring axial-flow compressors and annular combustion chambers optimized for fast starts and load-following. In contrast, heavy-duty frame turbines like the GE 9HA are engineered for durability and baseload operation, employing robust radial compressors, can-annular combustors, and thicker casings to withstand higher pressures and temperatures over extended durations. These structural differences directly influence their operational profiles. Aeroderivatives achieve ramp rates exceeding 50 MW/minute, making them ideal for peaking and grid-balancing roles, while frame turbines typically ramp at 15–30 MW/minute, favoring stable, high-output operation.

Maintenance requirements diverge significantly between the two classes. Aeroderivatives demand more frequent inspections (every 20,000–30,000 operating hours) due to high-stress components but benefit from modular replacement strategies that minimize downtime. The SGT-800, for instance, allows individual gas generator swaps in under 24 hours. Frame turbines leverage their rugged construction for longer intervals (32,000–48,000 hours), though outages are more complex, requiring on-site machining or rotor replacements lasting weeks. These factors dictate their economic niches: aeroderivatives dominate applications requiring cycling flexibility, such as renewable integration, while frame turbines excel in combined-cycle baseload plants.

Hydrogen compatibility introduces distinct challenges for each design. Aeroderivatives face combustion stability risks due to hydrogen’s high flame speed, necessitating advanced dilution systems or staged burners. The SGT-800 currently supports 75% hydrogen blends using dry low-emissions (DLE) technology, with full 100% operation requiring combustor retrofits. Frame turbines benefit from larger combustion volumes, enabling easier flame control. The GE 9HA employs micromix combustors to mitigate NOx formation at 50% hydrogen, with demonstrations targeting 100% via water injection. However, scalability to pure hydrogen remains constrained by materials limitations—particularly in aeroderivatives, where hydrogen embrittlement risks are acute for high-strength alloys in compressor blades.

Thermodynamic performance further differentiates the classes. Aeroderivatives achieve 40–42% simple-cycle efficiency (SGT-800: 41.5%), while frame turbines prioritize combined-cycle performance (9HA.02: 64%). This efficiency gap narrows in hydrogen service, as both types suffer derating from lower energy density. The 9HA’s larger mass flow compensates better, exhibiting a 7% output drop at 50% hydrogen versus the SGT-800’s 12%. Emissions profiles also vary: aeroderivatives produce higher NOx at partial loads due to lean-premix combustion sensitivity, whereas frame turbines maintain sub-15 ppm NOx across wider ranges with multi-stage combustion.

Manufacturer roadmaps reveal divergent hydrogen strategies. Siemens focuses on incremental blending for aeroderivatives, emphasizing fuel flexibility for distributed generation. Their SGT-800 evolution includes flame monitoring upgrades to handle 100% hydrogen by 2030. GE pursues heavy-frame dominance, with the 9HA platform designed for future retrofit to full hydrogen via combustion liner modifications and advanced coatings. Both face material science hurdles—hydrogen embrittlement in aeroderivative turbine disks and combustor liner fatigue in frame turbines under high-thermal cycling.

Infrastructure requirements further contrast the two classes. Aeroderivatives like the SGT-800 integrate easily into existing peaker plants with minimal balance-of-plant modifications for hydrogen blends. Frame turbines demand substantial auxiliary system overhauls—hydrogen storage, compression, and pipeline retrofits scale exponentially with their larger fuel consumption. A 9HA.02 at baseload requires 50+ tons of hydrogen daily, complicating logistics versus an SGT-800’s 8-ton peaking demand.

Market positioning reflects these technical tradeoffs. Aeroderivative adoption concentrates in regions with high renewable penetration (California, Germany) where fast ramping justifies higher $/kW costs. The SGT-800’s 53–63 MW output suits urban load centers needing dispatchable power. Heavy-duty frames dominate markets with firm capacity requirements—the 9HA’s 838 MW combined-cycle output anchors Asian and Middle Eastern mega-projects blending hydrogen with natural gas.

Looking ahead, 100% hydrogen operation demands breakthrough materials. Aeroderivatives require novel nickel superalloys resistant to hydrogen-induced cracking at 1,300°C+ temperatures. Frame turbines need ceramic matrix composites (CMCs) for combustors to endure prolonged hydrogen flame temperatures. Neither class has demonstrated fully commercial hydrogen operation at scale, though pilot projects (Siemens’ Brande, GE’s Long Ridge) provide operational data informing next-gen designs.

In summary, the choice between aeroderivative and heavy-duty hydrogen turbines hinges on application-specific needs. Aeroderivatives offer unparalleled flexibility for grid support but face steeper hydrogen adaptation challenges. Heavy-duty frames deliver scale and efficiency better suited to future hydrogen baseload but require substantial infrastructure investments. Both pathways are essential for decarbonization, with technological convergence expected as materials innovation bridges today’s limitations.